HPE ProLiant DL Servers Reviews

• It helps with work-load management
• It's a reliable solution
• It's easy to fix
• It's easy to work with and manage

I have never implemented them as part of an organization, but I worked with these rack servers while providing support for customers.

During the period of time I was providing tech support for this product line, I was able to see that its fault tolerance is really high, providing the capability of a reaction against a “disaster” and the failure rate is really low.

Obviously, you will still have hardware failures, but it is not something you can easily fix. This is more about the regular hardware failures that you may get on daily basis such as a bad HDD, NIC failure or regular hardware failures that may be present due to the normal workload of the server, meaning that they have or exceeded the lifetime or they are presenting a huge workload.

Regarding the normal functionality of the server as is, the only improvement I would say is to continue with the research and the development of higher workload capacities as the customer needs are constantly growing, therefore the demand for what the product requires to do will also grow, to avoid the demand to elapse behind the improving of the technology needs to be continued. It's tied to the needs of the end users and any new features that they would require in order to better manage their organizations.

I’ve worked with these products for over three years providing technical support for the HP ISS industry customers. I did not need to use them in a production environment.

I was part of the technical support team.

I used to guide customers with the installation, and the initial setup was always straightforward.

• Different form factors
• Small footprint
• Good compromise between pricing schema and available options
• Support and care packs add-ons

The product fits well between tight budgets and horizontal expansions.

More options beyond the ROM configurations for High Power computing and ULV (Ultra Low Voltage) deployments.

I've used the ProLiant servers since 2005.

The G6 was not a stable product.

If you had a Care Pack in place, the support was 9/10. In case you were left with no Care Pack, the best-effort option was worth nothing.

Many times the setup had to be agreed and consulted with HP representatives and technical after-sales staff.

Implementation was done in-house although physical installation was done through the vendor, as it was included in the price. When HP sent their consultants or staff to do the job, things moved faster. You should invest in your partners’ professional education MORE.

We consider ROI on not more than 24 months for our business cases, and hardware turnover on a three years basis. HP pricing and licensing schemas fitted well into our agendas.

Yes, we looked at equivalent products from SUN/Oracle and IBM. We chose HP for specific deployments and pricing comparison.

The HP SmartArray, as this takes care of RAID rebuilding.

I've used 350 disks, had eight disk replacements, and two controllers over three years.

Better power usage monitoring would be nice.

I used it for three years.

When replacing RAID card in the server one must re-install the license for ADG/RAID6.

No issues encountered.

We increased the amount of shelves per server to six, and we have had no issues.

Great, it's just an e-mail.

It's good, but their on-site is not familiar with this setup.

We had a mixture of Sun Thor and HP C-class with AMS FC storage from Hitachi.

It went fine, and it even came pre-installed with RHEL, however, we reinstalled it with SL.

We did it in-house.

It works fine, it gave quite a lot of storage per rack unit. There are better options for storage density these days. Also, there are better options for more storage per rack unit, and more CPU power.

With x86 hardware, a lot of it is the same. The value goes back to HP's willingness to partner and HP having a roadmap for the x86 platform.

No issues with stability or other major issues.

No issues with stability or other major issues.

HP is a market leader for scalability and additions.

Support has been helpful. Both customer and technical support have been very responsive to help make things right.

It was a market shift into x86 hardware and more commodity-based hardware.

Initial setup was straightforward.

• IBM
• Lenovo
• Dell

We chose HP because they had the right combination of factors and willingness to partner.

Reliability, support, and performance. A roadmap for where they are going in the future is important. We have that with HP.

I like the centralized systems, and I like the fact that they’re rugged. When they get delivered to you, there are no failures and they’ve already been tested and ready to go. For us it was important because we had to install about 20 of them in one week.

It’s more an Intel advantage. The fact that the Gen9 relies on the latest CPUs from Intel, it’s a very high density of processing power that serves our needs greatly.

By default on the Gen9 server, they remove the screenports and USB ports in front of the servers, and you have to purchase them. I didn’t know that beforehand. Now, when I troubleshoot things I have to connect things in the back. The new design should fix that.

Out of the 40 servers we’ve added, there’s only been one incident of a hardware issue in almost three years. It was resolved very quickly.

Very good. Our business model relies on high scaling of code and adding servers to support that. For us, we need that sufficient processing power, which has been very good.

If anything, they’re over-caring – they’ll chase you down if they see any problem. We had an issue opened and they really made sure it was resolved.

Growth – our biggest problem is spontaneous growth. We sign new customers and our processing requirement levels spike, and we needed to meet that demand.

Very straightforward – we got them out of the box, racked them and they were good to go.

Oracle Sun Servers and IBM. Based on past experiences (we’ve used both, and were previously a mixed environment), they weren’t quite as stable as HP.

It’s good, but the display ports are ill-designed.

We look for stability when choosing a new vendor. It’s extremely important to us. But, find a local partner to make sure that you make the right choice. I’m from Montreal, so I use ACCII, so build your order to fit your needs. Understand all the options available to you to fit your workload, not the other way around.

It’s very powerful, so we can offer good services for our network. It offers a very reliable framework for our judicial needs. Hyper-V software gave us more capacity to consistently meet our judges' needs. I think the most valuable feature, from my end, is that HP is a strong platform on which to host our services. It has good life-cycle performance and it will work continuously. In general, it’s a very good machine.

We’ve got 30,000 lawyers connecting every day, and we needed to serve them in an efficient manner. This is done by managing their dockets well and automating the process in a streamlined manner. By allowing our lawyers to automate the process, we are able to better serve their needs.

We honestly don’t have any problems. It’s a well-built machine, and there are no problems with the servers.

It’s pretty stable. We are using the DL-380 line, and we have 14 servers that go into three racks for two data centers.

It’s scalable, and it doesn’t take that much effort to do so. When you prioritize simplicity, it’s much easier to scale quickly and you don’t need to buy much more.

It was never a big problem for us. When a part breaks, it doesn’t take long for us to replace the part. It was easy for us to switch in third-party servers temporarily while waiting for the spare part to arrive from HP, and it would work just fine.

We were using Compac. In the public sector, when you buy, you do it through a public process. You can’t choose, you write the specifications of your needs, and then vendors offer their products. We do our buying through our RFP process.

Very easy. It’s always an easy thing for us to install, as our staff has good knowledge.

We also looked at Dell and Lenovo. We always look at multiple vendors to compare pricing, which, for the public sector, is extremely important. With HP, the prices weren’t too different from other vendors, but for us it was the right choice when considering the total cost.

We have a private-cloud data center, but we also host publicly for some customers. The software that we’re offering to our buyers is web-enabled for both internal and external users. So the servers needed to be powerful and simple to use.

For me, in the public sector, it was never that concerning for us to get the latest release of servers. Our users were satisfied with using older servers that served their needs just fine, and it saved us a lot of money as we didn’t have to pay the premium for the newest servers.

HP has been very good for us. I would recommend buying exactly what you need and the same line of the hardware to be consistent.

I am impressed with the tool’s stability.

I would like the solution to improve its storage and performance. Also, I would like to replicate data between on-premises and cloud in future versions.

I have been using the solution for 14 years.

I would rate the tool’s stability a ten out of ten. I never had any issues with its stability.

We are not concerned about the tool's scalability since our systems get replaced after three to four years.

I would rate the tool’s setup an eight out of ten.

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.